Backpackers Beware

[Danimal16]

Sniper,

I think you have made your point. RPEKSQ will never be forthright about it on this forum. If he has done all of the things he claims to have done, that is an easy day. But I concur, his tone is immensely mocking. There is more to this guy but it is a waste of time. I have seen educated idiots, and most of them wear their degrees on their sleeves. SO it is pointless to try and make a point with this guy. AND why as he is extremely critical and arrogant, regardless of the facts. There is just too much that has my caution meter pegging.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Phil Shoemaker, a Master Guide in Alaska, is on record as saying he would happily hunt the biggest bears in the land with his .30-'06. Mr. Shoemaker "gets it". Shot placement is far more important than caliber. No .300 wonder mag will ever make up for that. Too many that use them believe that they will, and wind up taking risky or poor shots with them

I agree with this entirely, however, sometimes due to target aspect you need a caliber that can get through the thickest bones/hide on an animal and still get into the vitals. Will a .30-30 even penetrate the skull of a grizzly if it charges? (Charges do happen, even white tail will charge sometimes after they get shot)

A .30-06 is a damn fine weapon, and many people are of the opinion that it is sufficient to hunt any animal in N.America, and it is- if everything goes right.

You can probably kill a Grizzly with a .22 WMR if you get the right shot. If you're a great stalker, you could probably even kill a bunch of them with a .22 WMR. But if something goes wrong...

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I have never expressed any desire to use too little weapon.

Never meant to imply that you did.

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I was simply pointing out what others use, and how effective they are with their choice of weapons. I regularly hunt with the .375 H&H, .45-70 with my heavy hand loads, and the .458 Winchester Magnum.

Those seem like damn good choices to me.

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Alas, I also use calibers that guys like you would deem "inadequate", like the .30-30, 6.5 Swede (my favorite, actually), and round ball muzzle loaders. When used properly, all kill quickly and humanely, regardless the size of the animal. When we take the time to hunt them, and have the patience to wait for that one sure shot.

"Guys like me" include the State game commissions of all 50 states that set minimum legal caliber requirements for the hunting of large game. I've hunted dear with .30-30 several times- it's a great caliber, especially in the terrain where i live, but i definitely would not choose that caliber to hunt Grizzly's with or to hunt on the open western plains with. I seriously, seriously doubt you would either. Then again i could just ask you- would you hunt grizzly with a .30-30?

Muzzle loaders due to their huge calibers are not really comparable to modern high velocity rifles IMO. Different animals entirely.

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

When used properly, all kill quickly and humanely, regardless the size of the animal. When we take the time to hunt them, and have the patience to wait for that one sure shot.

When all goes well. If you get a bit of bad luck or a untimely wind gust or an errant branch in your way(which is a huge consideration here in Pa), it can totally ruin an otherwise perfectly good shot, causing a wound or even an outright miss. 99% of the time that just means the animal gets away. But with a large predatory animal like a bear, if you don't have more shots, things can get very ugly very quickly.

My point is that Murphy is alive and well and he is a hunter. So plan accordingly.

As far as you and your knowledge, i think you definitely know what you're talking about in all things gun. 90+% of the time i agree with your gun points entirely. In the time i've been posting here i think the only time we ever disagreed on anything gun related prior to this was the JHP vs Cast bullet conversation.

Still, even among people with dozens of years of experience opinions will vary, and often greatly.

Originally Posted by Danimal16

Sniper,

I think you have made your point (about) RPEKSQ

Roger that bro. He's back on ignore now. I should have never taken him off ignore to begin with.

[fintstone]

I used to know a guy that hunted for bear with a bow...but carried a 357 magnum pistol for backup.

[Fishman7]

My brother shot a black bear with a long bow he made from scratch, but frenchy probably killed one with his bare hands while eating a croissant.

[CRH911S]

Moses, thanks for posting that picture. Still, there will be those thoroughly convinced that these mighty creatures have it out for human kind. Many will never understand the natural cycles of life which is what life is really all about in my opinion. I would also add that mere weeks earlier prior to the salmon this isn't something I would recommend.
And for anyone interested in knowing, the Gull Rock Trail south of Hope and the Resurrection Pass are great travel destination for anyone interested in visiting Alaska's back country. Is it important to be bear savy? Of course it is and that's why you rarely hear of bear-human contact in these areas. Still, it doesn't hurt to carry a Mossberg Cruiser just in case.

[CRH911S]

http://dwb.adn.com/news/alaska/wildlife/story/9359737p-9270866c.html
Take the time to read this. Kat bears are human habituated due to the sancturary not far from where this bear was murdered. Call it what you want but this isn't hunting and it isn't fair chase. The only consolation I get out of it is the cowards can't go back to where they came from and make up some kind of great hunting story which is really just a couple of dorks in expensive gear that had to rely on a modern weapon to do their dirty work.

[Vonzipper]

This video should be enough to keep everyone safe, we now know their weak spots

Mosses, great shots

[RPKESQ]

Originally Posted by CRH911S

http://dwb.adn.com/news/alaska/wildlife/story/9359737p-9270866c.html
Take the time to read this. Kat bears are human habituated due to the sancturary not far from where this bear was murdered. Call it what you want but this isn't hunting and it isn't fair chase. The only consolation I get out of it is the cowards can't go back to where they came from and make up some kind of great hunting story which is really just a couple of dorks in expensive gear that had to rely on a modern weapon to do their dirty work.

How very sad. This is why I stopped promoting many hunts, stopped participating in many and stopped supporting the Safari Club. I met more idiots than sportsmen, more cheaters than fair-chase adherents and more of the nitwits who tell you about how dangerous bears, great whites and liberals are. In short, more of the talentless, narrow-minded and ill educated, who are clearly insecure about their place in the world.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

I was waiting for the first tree-hugging bambiist to post...

You are aware grizzly bears are known to feed on humans right? Survival of the fittest. Jeff was fitter than the bear.

Hey Bill, i laughed when Bambi's mommy got shot.

I gotta' disagree with you on this one.

Humans are known to feed on each other too - should we go around indiscriminately killing everyone just because they *might* end up being the one who's a Jeffery Dahmer?

I abhor hunting. Truly a disgusting pastime. And FWIW I'm completely unimpressed. Want to impress me? Go take the bear armed with exactly what the bear has - what it was born with. Then I'll agree with you that it's a "sport".

There is absolutely NO need to be going around slaughtering animals for no reason other than to go back home and brag to one's buddies (or online) about how "tough" one was because they happened to look through a scope and pull a trigger from long range - particularly when it's against defenseless animals like deer or elk.

Have I mentioned how utterly despicable this "sport" is?

I have no use for it - or those that participate in it, other than perhaps they give some justification for what's left of our Second Amendment to the politicians and unwashed masses who can't comprehend the intentions of the founding fathers when they provided us that right. To that end I suppose there might be SOME merit to it in this day and age, but it is still is a reprehensible behavior.

Note: If one is living in the remote wilds of Alaska, or the Amazon, or the Outback or somewhere like that hundreds of miles from habitation and NEEDS to hunt to survive, then fine. That ain't the case here. This is "sport" hunting at its most vile.

You're aware the Grizzly Bear is (among other things) the state animal of California and prominently featured on the state flag? They were all hunted to extinction in this state in the 1800s. Yep. Real fair fight there, huh? The bears must've really had an "even" chance huh? I really question the nature of someone that would just indiscriminately kill animals for no reason other than to brag about it. It's one very, very small step away from people who like to kill/torture animals for pleasure and that's one very, very small step away from those who end up becoming violent criminals or psychopaths. Why put onesself in that situation?

Sorry snipe (and others here) - I normally agree with you guys on a lot of things/issues, but this is one where I passionately disagree. I find this notion of just killing for the hell of it to be extremely unethical, in bad taste, despicable and the height of needless bravado. Can't some of you guys put your time/energy into something PRODUCTIVE? How about some legitimate conservation efforts? That'd be a good start... Something that actually BENEFITS our planet.

[m21sniper]

You didn't really just call deer and elk 'defenseless' did you?

Wow.

An elk can absolutely thrash a man with ease. No problem at all. The man would stand no chance at all.

When a man shoots an animal he is hunting with the tools god gave him. Opposable thumbs and intelligent reasoning.

The bear gets claws, elk get horns- we get thumbs.

BTW Jeff, Hunters pay for 75% of the budgets of all State conservation efforts in the US. (via special taxes and hunting/fishing licenses) If you took away the monies generated by hunting which are funneled directly into conservation causes, our herds would suffer mightily.

I agree with the poster earlier that asked why cows seem to be ok to slaughter wholesale, in an industrialized setting. Not many people seem to get too freaked out over eating a hamburger. I guess they're not "cute" or "majestic" enough.

I have never shot any animal that was not then eaten (By me or someone else). When i used to hunt, i did it the 'old fashioned way' that my uncle taught me. No lures, no scents, no decoys, no lights, no cheating.

I don't think anyone here, anyone, has endorsed the corporate hunts and game ranches or other types of "hunting" that people do so they can "brag."

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by Vonzipper

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG02fwZBflw

LOL, great video man!

[Fishman7]

I don't think anyone here condones "canned" hunting at all, I sure don't. Heck on my property (86 acres) I have put in deer food plots for forage, not a lot of farms left around here. This buck was taken by a 12 year old last fall, nourishment for a family of 6, I feel good about that.

[t951]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

I gotta' disagree with you on this one.

Humans are known to feed on each other too - should we go around indiscriminately killing everyone just because they *might* end up being the one who's a Jeffery Dahmer?

I abhor hunting. Truly a disgusting pastime. And FWIW I'm completely unimpressed. Want to impress me? Go take the bear armed with exactly what the bear has - what it was born with. Then I'll agree with you that it's a "sport".

There is absolutely NO need to be going around slaughtering animals for no reason other than to go back home and brag to one's buddies (or online) about how "tough" one was because they happened to look through a scope and pull a trigger from long range - particularly when it's against defenseless animals like deer or elk.

Have I mentioned how utterly despicable this "sport" is?

I have no use for it - or those that participate in it, other than perhaps they give some justification for what's left of our Second Amendment to the politicians and unwashed masses who can't comprehend the intentions of the founding fathers when they provided us that right. To that end I suppose there might be SOME merit to it in this day and age, but it is still is a reprehensible behavior.

Note: If one is living in the remote wilds of Alaska, or the Amazon, or the Outback or somewhere like that hundreds of miles from habitation and NEEDS to hunt to survive, then fine. That ain't the case here. This is "sport" hunting at its most vile.

You're aware the Grizzly Bear is (among other things) the state animal of California and prominently featured on the state flag? They were all hunted to extinction in this state in the 1800s. Yep. Real fair fight there, huh? The bears must've really had an "even" chance huh? I really question the nature of someone that would just indiscriminately kill animals for no reason other than to brag about it. It's one very, very small step away from people who like to kill/torture animals for pleasure and that's one very, very small step away from those who end up becoming violent criminals or psychopaths. Why put onesself in that situation?

Sorry snipe (and others here) - I normally agree with you guys on a lot of things/issues, but this is one where I passionately disagree. I find this notion of just killing for the hell of it to be extremely unethical, in bad taste, despicable and the height of needless bravado. Can't some of you guys put your time/energy into something PRODUCTIVE? How about some legitimate conservation efforts? That'd be a good start... Something that actually BENEFITS our planet.

Well written. I completely agree.

I have a plethora of firearms, but I couldn't imagine killing an animal for "sport".

Maybe we could hunt death row inmates. They can think, cheat, etc. That seems to be more fair than picking off animals with high powered rifles.

[jeffgrant]

I'm an active hunter, and even as we speak I have a venison and bear shepherd's pie cooking in the oven.

I do not hunt for trophies, but if a trophy presents itself, I will gladly take it. I have a rack mounted to the wall, and a bear-skin rug in front of my fireplace.

I will also take the entire animal with me out of the bush, every time, regardless of the work involved. My motivations for hunting do not include the desire for trophies.

I hunt with a great deal of reverence for the tradition, and choose to hunt in as true a fashion as I can; no tree stands, no dogs, no herding of animals, no 400 yard shots. That is my choice. I have the same scoped, bolt-action .30-06 I bought new when I was 16. I train every year to ensure that my shooting is up to the task, and 99% of my kills have been with a single shot.

My ageing father, who can't hardly walk any more, is usually set up with a chair in a small blind, and we do what we can to direct any wildlife near him to help increase his chances, and I have no qualms about doing that. He has enjoyed hunting his entire life, and I will not take that away just because of the frailties brought on by age.

Those people that wish to hunt in a more (to me) unsportsmanlike manner, well, that's their prerogative. I don't do it, and neither do any of my friends or hunting partners, but it just means that those others just don't "get it", in my opinion.

Hunting is also a very bittersweet thing... there is a mixture of joy and sadness when an animal is killed, but I take comfort in knowing that it was killed quickly and cleanly, and will not be wasted. I also take great satisfaction knowing that I can support myself in the wild, and don't need my food handed to me wrapped in styrofoam and cling-wrap.

My time hunting (19 years and counting) has also taught me more about the environment, and has increased my appreciation for and involvement with conservation.


I've hunted with a conservation officer for many, many years, and the stories he has are truly entertaining and enlightening. There are a few known "poachers" who hunt illegally to feed their families rather than be on welfare and food stamps. They are known, and their transgressions are overlooked. Rightfully so, in my opinion.


In the end, hunting is a very personal thing. Some people do it, others don't. It's almost as bad (good?) as religion for getting people arguing. If you don't like it, then don't do it.

I just ask that you don't think any less of me for hunting, just as I won't think any less of you for NOT hunting.


$0.02

[jeffgrant]

Originally Posted by t951

I have a plethora of firearms, but I couldn't imagine killing an animal for "sport".

And that is your choice, and I respect you for it. I'm just not a fan of people telling me that hunting is evil and I shouldn't do it. (Not saying that is what you're doing either).


I'd rather hunt a game animal for sport, and kill it cleanly, myself, than eat beef or poultry that has been "harvested" in a modern day slaughterhouse or rendering factory.


I have no problem harvesting and processing (killing and butchering) my own food. It's a much better option for me than relying on others to do it and burying my head in the sand.


Jamie Oliver had a great mini-series about travelling through Italy while cooking. He came across a village that did group hunts for wild boar, in order to feed the families of that village.

During that hunt, many of the children (6-10 years old), were introduced and educated about the hunting of the animals, and the respect demanded of the event. At first, Jamie was absolutely disgusted with that.

After thinking about it, and seeing the results of that education, he realized that it was all part of the chain of life in the world, and that he then planned on doing the same thing with his children.

It was a very powerful episode, and a lesson I think many more people need to learn.

[p911dad]

Talk about your polarized body! This is all about modern man(urban man with lost connection to true nature, has a fantasy ideal of what nature really is), and natural man(still connected to the soil, and still recognizes natural reality). The two are not compatible and are not likely to belong to the same social club. The former has an exaggerated moral component that decries hunting and killing game, but easily buys packaged meat in the supermarket(remote kill of game), in fact depends on this system. The natural man buys meat in the supermarket and also keeps his skills for hunting and fishing, can clean and butcher a kill and eat it. It simply depends on who is doing your killing. Some guys like to kill their own game. Some can't or won't do it and pay others to do it for them. I will take a pass for a vegetarian, otherwise you omnivores that buy your kill in packages, get real. The guys that took the bear are likely also deer hunters or duck hunters that take game and consume them. For sure bears are not good eating and leaving the carcass in the forest to be eaten by other meateaters doesn't sound like it was a wasteful or irresponsible kill. To a natural man, a bear as big as Bruno in the picture would be a once-in-a-lifetime trophy well worth taking. Surely a bear that large was a dominant male and had his way with the ladies many times, ensuring his progeny will carry on in the big woods. Sometimes you eat the bear; sometimes the bear eats you.

[t951]

Originally Posted by jeffgrant

And that is your choice, and I respect you for it. I'm just not a fan of people telling me that hunting is evil and I shouldn't do it. (Not saying that is what you're doing either).


I'd rather hunt a game animal for sport, and kill it cleanly, myself, than eat beef or poultry that has been "harvested" in a modern day slaughterhouse or rendering factory.


I have no problem harvesting and processing (killing and butchering) my own food. It's a much better option for me than relying on others to do it and burying my head in the sand.


Jamie Oliver had a great mini-series about travelling through Italy while cooking. He came across a village that did group hunts for wild boar, in order to feed the families of that village.

During that hunt, many of the children (6-10 years old), were introduced and educated about the hunting of the animals, and the respect demanded of the event. At first, Jamie was absolutely disgusted with that.

After thinking about it, and seeing the results of that education, he realized that it was all part of the chain of life in the world, and that he then planned on doing the same thing with his children.

It was a very powerful episode, and a lesson I think many more people need to learn.

I agree with what a lot of what you are saying, and I take your point.

So, I have no problem with people who hunt out of NEED. I think its good that people eat what they have hunted, as I find people who hunt simply for trophies useless.

Now, one point that my friends, who are avid hunters have made to me that truly resonates is as follows.

If you simply eat a burger or a steak that you pick up from the grocery store you have no idea of the life that was involved. My friend Chris stated that he didn't appreciate how special his meal was until he killed it. (It was a turkey, and he said he actually sat and thought about the life that he had taken).

Anyway, the point is, food is not a commodity, it was part of a life. He states that until people connect that thought they won't behave right. Meaning, that if we all respected the life that we so easily consume, we may not be as greedy and fat, etc. And that in turn would lead to more animals being spared.

I am not anti hunting per se. I am against hunting for the sake of merely killing.

[jeffgrant]

Originally Posted by t951

I am against hunting for the sake of merely killing.

I feel the same.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of people equate hunting with exactly that, and that's just not what happens in the vast majority of hunting.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

Then again i could just ask you- would you hunt grizzly with a .30-30?

No, I would not. I'm merely relaying what others can accomplish with this "underpowered" cartridge. I will readily concede that the folks I'm referring too are far, far better hunters than I can ever dream of becoming. They live and breathe it in a way I simply cannot.

My circumstances dictate that when I do go after game such as this, I am limited by time. I must hire a guide, by law, to hunt game like this. That guide is certainly going to have his own ideas on what I need to bring, and a .30-30 is not on their short list. This is going to cost me a lot of money as well. All of these factors add up tome bringing a rifle and cartridge combination that will serve for a less than ideal shot. Shots that I would pass up on one of my local weekend sojourns after lesser game. Shots that the native Alaskan hunter will pass up, because he always has tomorrow, or next week, or next month. He has the virtue of an abundance of the most valuable commodity of all for guys like you and me - time.

I'm as human as the next guy. If my only chance at the bear of a lifetime was a "Texas heart shot" on one disappearing into an alder thicket, after three weeks in the coastal Alaskan rain, and flying out tomorrow... I don't think I could pass it up. I would sure love to be able to slip a 500 grain solid up the spout on the old .458...

Here at home, it's different. I could care less anymore if I have to pass up a shot on even a great mulie or bull elk because I'm carrying some "inadequate" antique or something. I've done my share of killing - it just doesn't matter to me anymore.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

An elk can absolutely thrash a man with ease. No problem at all. The man would stand no chance at all.

I have never heard of an elk attacking a human un-provoked. Do I have to start worrying about this now too? Bands of killer elk wandering the streets of LA spoiling for a good goring?